Knowing someone can forge your signature

[abby]

On a recent international flight with am employee, I was asleep when the flight attendant handed out the customs / immigration forms. My employee thought she'd be helpful and fill mine out for me... Including the signature.

I was alarmed to notice that she did a damn good job of forging it (she said she practised a few times on scrap paper on the flight). My signature is not especially difficult to forge, I guess (but I did not think she'd be able to do it. Her handwriting is nothing like mine).

I know this girl quite well, she has been an employee for the last five years. She often lies in small ways, but she's pretty good at her job, and I kinda figure the devil you know is better... I could tell her not to ever do it again, but that would only underline the significance of what she has done (she prolly does not realise the havoc she could cause in my business and personal life). She regularly deals with cash cheques for $7,000, for example.

So, I guess I should change my signature, huh? Will that invalidate contracts and other things I have signed with my "old" signature? I guess I'll need a new CC, and to tell the bank I have a new signature as well.

It's certainly going to be a massive PITA.

a

[Ice Wolf]

I'd have doubts about keeping her on as an employee, myself.

[Shagnasty]

That was and is a traditional secretary/administrative assistant skill. I doubt it is completely legal but often born out of necessity for when the boss is out of the office and things need to be signed. If her job is like that, I would give her the benefit of the doubt because she probably thought that was something you would expect from her. She may have done it for former employers. I have known many trusted people in those positions that can do that.

[abby]

Shagnasty, good point. In some ways she was showing off, but she was also assisting me (which her role partly is, but signing things as me is most def not in her job description). She often prepares cheques for me to sign, and has never signed one of them (nor have I asked her to).

a

[even sven]

I wouldn't worry about it. A signature isn't really much of a security device, anyone with five minutes of time can fake one. And half the time nobody even checks.

If she's been good and honest in the past, you are better of sticking with her than taking a risk on someone you don't know.

[David Simmons]

Originally Posted by even sven

I wouldn't worry about it. A signature isn't really much of a security device, anyone with five minutes of time can fake one. And half the time nobody even checks.

If she's been good and honest in the past, you are better of sticking with her than taking a risk on someone you don't know.

If you are really concerned you might face the situation directly. Tell her that you appreciate the thought behind her action but that you don't want that sort of thing done. People never know for sure what it is that you want or don't want unless you tell them.

[Shalmanese]

A signiture is more of a psychological thing than any real valid security measure. It's more about whether she is willing than able to forge ones.

[t-bonham@scc.net]

Originally Posted by Shagnasty

That was and is a traditional secretary/administrative assistant skill.

When I was young, my parents ran a small family business. Dad was President, and Mom was the Bookkeeper. She normally wrote out all the paychecks and signed Dad's name to them. Then she took his own paycheck, endorsed it on the back by signing his name again, and deposited it in the bank.

One time Dad actually endorsed it himself, and went off to the small-town bank to deposit it. Meanwhile, Mom was on the phone to the bank, and mentioned to the manager that he was coming in to deposit his paycheck, and this time, one of the 3 signatures on it was actually his. The bank manager (a highschool buddy of Dad's), decided to play a joke on him, and went out to talk to the teller.

So when Dad came in to deposit that check, the teller made a big show of looking it over very carefully, and then told him "I'm sorry, sir, but we can't accept this check -- this signature isn't the one we're used to on this account." Dad argued quite a but, and was about to get angry, when he noticed the bank manager and half the employees standing in back laughing.

[PatriotX]

Anyone can forge your signature.

It only becomes an issue if the signature is contested.

[pulykamell]

Originally Posted by PatriotX

Anyone can forge your signature.

It only becomes an issue if the signature is contested.

As I understand it, forgery is "the making or altering of a false writing with the intent to defraud." Emphasis mine. The attorneys I work for explained to me that it's not forgery if you have the permission or authority of the subject to sign their signature to, say, a check. I sign all sorts of documents, from checks to credit card purchases to legal motions, in their name if the situation requires it. I don't even make an attempt to make it look like their signature. That's (partly) why you have notary publics. If a signature is notarized that means the person signing the document is the same person who's name appears in the signature line, and has willfully appeared before the notary to sign the document.

[Lissa]

Originally Posted by pulykamell

As I understand it, forgery is "the making or altering of a false writing with the intent to defraud." Emphasis mine. The attorneys I work for explained to me that it's not forgery if you have the permission or authority of the subject to sign their signature to, say, a check.

This may not always be true-- perhaps each state varies in its laws on this matter.

My husband works in a prison. An inmate told him the reason why he had been incarcerated, which seemed so fantastic to my husband that he had to check it out. It turned out to be true.

The young man had been sent by his house-bound grandfather to buy the grandfather some furniture. The young man took the grandfather's credit card to a local furniture store, purchased the requested items, and had them sent to his grandfather's house. The young man signed his grandfather's name to the credit card slip.

The store somehow discovered that they young man was not the cardholder, and had him prosecuted. At the young man's trial, the elderly grandfather was brought in and made a statement that he had given permission, and had recieved the goods in question. There was no theft.

The judge said that didn't matter. The young man had technically violated the law in signing his grandfather's name. The young man went to prison.

[pulykamell]

Originally Posted by Lissa

This may not always be true-- perhaps each state varies in its laws on this matter.

My husband works in a prison. An inmate told him the reason why he had been incarcerated, which seemed so fantastic to my husband that he had to check it out. It turned out to be true.

The young man had been sent by his house-bound grandfather to buy the grandfather some furniture. The young man took the grandfather's credit card to a local furniture store, purchased the requested items, and had them sent to his grandfather's house. The young man signed his grandfather's name to the credit card slip.

The store somehow discovered that they young man was not the cardholder, and had him prosecuted. At the young man's trial, the elderly grandfather was brought in and made a statement that he had given permission, and had recieved the goods in question. There was no theft.

The judge said that didn't matter. The young man had technically violated the law in signing his grandfather's name. The young man went to prison.

Really? That sounds very odd, to say the least.

[Harriet the Spry]

I also think that last seems very odd. Why would the furniture store prosecute? The store gets paid by the credit card company. If anyone were "wronged" here, it would be the credit card company, whose terms may not have been followed. Laws aside, why on earth would a store prosecute a paying customer? Could this possibly have been a case of purchasing with store credit? Maybe using the credit card as ID or something?

[Lissa]

Originally Posted by Harriet the Spry

I also think that last seems very odd. Why would the furniture store prosecute? The store gets paid by the credit card company. If anyone were "wronged" here, it would be the credit card company, whose terms may not have been followed. Laws aside, why on earth would a store prosecute a paying customer? Could this possibly have been a case of purchasing with store credit? Maybe using the credit card as ID or something?

I do not know if it was a store credit card. I asked Hubby, and he can't remember.

He told me the entire story last night-- forgive me if I left out these details.

The grandfather was senile. When he got the bill for the furniture, he called and said he'd never purchased anything. The store reported it because they thought, initially, that it was a fraud. By the time the true story came out, it had been gone before a grand jury who indicted on forgery charges.

The prosecutor went before the judge and was willing to drop the charges. The grandfather was brought to court and said that he had forgotten he had gotten the new furniture because of his senility. The judge said that didn't matter-- the young man had, admittedly, forged his grandfather's name.

The young man's convicton was for forgery, and he was sentenced to nine months of incarceration. He's since been released, having completed his sentence.

My husband didn't believe it, either, thinking there HAD to be more to it than that. It's a "crime" many of us commit every day. He actually went down to the vaults and pulled the records, and found out that, yes, it was true.

[robby]

Originally Posted by pulykamell

As I understand it, forgery is "the making or altering of a false writing with the intent to defraud." Emphasis mine. The attorneys I work for explained to me that it's not forgery if you have the permission or authority of the subject to sign their signature to, say, a check. I sign all sorts of documents, from checks to credit card purchases to legal motions, in their name if the situation requires it. I don't even make an attempt to make it look like their signature. That's (partly) why you have notary publics. If a signature is notarized that means the person signing the document is the same person who's name appears in the signature line, and has willfully appeared before the notary to sign the document.

So, if it ever becomes an issue, how do you prove that you have the permission or authority of the subject to sign their signature for them? Do you have this permission in writing?

It seems to me that the very act of signing someone else's name indicates an intent to defraud. You are not that person, but by your act of signing a name that is not your own, you are attempting to deceive.

In my engineering firm, I was recently asked to sign a contract for one of the managers who was out. I refused. I offered to sign my own name over the manager's signature block, with a "by direction" notation following my signature, but I will not sign someone else's name. After all, if the contract was ever brought up in a legal action, the first thing the manager in question could say is, "I never signed that, and that's not my signature!"

When I was in the Navy, serving on a nuclear submarine, many actions, including the authority to commence reactor startup, required a signature from the Engineer and/or the CO. To conduct maintenance on equipment, a sailor needed my signature. Anyone who ever even contemplated forging a superior's signature would find themselves brought up on charges and off the boat posthaste. I can't even imagine doing such a thing.

[pulykamell]

Originally Posted by robby

So, if it ever becomes an issue, how do you prove that you have the permission or authority of the subject to sign their signature for them? Do you have this permission in writing?

Honestly, I don't know. Hopefully a lawyer can come in and clear up matters, or I can ask in the office tomorrow. All I know is that I routinely sign their names to checks and credit card receipts. As for legal documents such as motions, notices of motion, notices of filing, certificates of service, etc., I sign their name with a "/" followed by "by ABC" where ABC is my initials.

[doreen]

Originally Posted by Lissa

I do not know if it was a store credit card. I asked Hubby, and he can't remember.

He told me the entire story last night-- forgive me if I left out these details.

The grandfather was senile. When he got the bill for the furniture, he called and said he'd never purchased anything. The store reported it because they thought, initially, that it was a fraud. By the time the true story came out, it had been gone before a grand jury who indicted on forgery charges.

The prosecutor went before the judge and was willing to drop the charges. The grandfather was brought to court and said that he had forgotten he had gotten the new furniture because of his senility. The judge said that didn't matter-- the young man had, admittedly, forged his grandfather's name.

This makes a little more sense - the grandfather first said he didn't get the furniture ( and presumably also that he didn't sign) and later recanted and said he did get the furniture that he gave the grandson permission to sign. My guess is that whoever convicted the grandson (judge or jury) believed the first version, and though the grandfather came up with the second one when he found out it was his grandson who bought the furniture.( It does happen - I've encountered plenty of people who reported their cars stolen and suddenly "remembered" lending them when a child or grandchild was with the car.)

[Ensign Edison]

If she intended to use her ability nefariously, why would she alert you to the fact that she had it?

I wouldn't dream of changing everything over this; though I don't have Important Business Stuff on the line, it just seems highly unlikely to be a problem. I find the "responsible for signing something you haven't read" part more disturbing, but I'd think if you explained it to her, she wouldn't do it again. If she did, fire her then. ;p

[Obsidian]

Originally Posted by Shagnasty

That was and is a traditional secretary/administrative assistant skill. I doubt it is completely legal but often born out of necessity for when the boss is out of the office and things need to be signed. If her job is like that, I would give her the benefit of the doubt because she probably thought that was something you would expect from her. She may have done it for former employers. I have known many trusted people in those positions that can do that.

I can (well, could, it's been a while with some) forge the signatures of all of my bosses. I am an EA by trade. I also had, during employment, possesion of these guys' social security numbers, credit cards, pins, etc. Often I ended up with the numbers memorized. There's never been anything nefarious about it. It SOP in my line of work, and business would grind to a hault if we didn't do this. My job requires a high level of trust regardless of these things.

If you're worried that this employee will DO something illegal with your signature, than that indicates a lack of trust that's probably a symptom of more than just this, and you should let her go.

[Nametag]

Originally Posted by Harriet the Spry

I also think that last seems very odd. Why would the furniture store prosecute? The store gets paid by the credit card company. If anyone were "wronged" here, it would be the credit card company, whose terms may not have been followed. Laws aside, why on earth would a store prosecute a paying customer? Could this possibly have been a case of purchasing with store credit? Maybe using the credit card as ID or something?

Common misconception: the store has nothing to do with it. If a prosecutor finds out about it, it's her decision and nobody else's. What's more confusing about this case is that the prosecutor was "willing" to drop the charges -- is it because the indictment was handed down by a grand jury that the prosecutor can't just drop it?

[Elendil's Heir]

In Ohio (and most states) the judge still has to take the additional - and legally necessary - step of actually dismissing the case. In 99.999% of cases, the judge will do it with no fuss, on the prosecutor's motion. (When I was a prosecutor I once had a judge refuse to approve a lawful, appropriate plea bargain that defense counsel and I had worked out. Very unusual, but then, she was a real jerk).

Sounds like the obliging grandson had the bad luck to be appearing before a particularly hard-nosed judge. The fact that the judge sent him to prison also suggests this.